A Peraves EcoMobile at a track day in Europe. Photos courtesy Peraves AG.

Those with a background riding motorcycles understand one simple truth: Compared to cars, motorcycles simply deliver more entertainment value. They generally accelerate more quickly than automobiles, stop in shorter distances, involve the rider in the environment instead of isolating him from it and even deliver better fuel economy. In inclement weather, however, the enjoyment of riding a motorcycle is offset by the inconvenience of perpetually impaired vision, potentially frozen extremities, and the misery of wet clothing, even under the best of rain gear. The ideal commuter vehicle, then, would be one that exhibited the positive aspects of a motorcycle, while negating its drawbacks. By that definition, the forward-thinking Peraves EcoMobile and its modern equivalent, the Peraves MonoTracer, may qualify as the optimal daily driver.

The brainchild of Swiss airline pilot Arnold Wagner, the EcoMobile, designed in 1974, is best described as an enclosed-cabin motorcycle that comes as close as possible to recreating the experience of flying at ground level. Like its open-air, two-wheeled counterpart, the EcoMobile relies on two wheels instead of four, except at low speeds when operator-deployed outriggers give the EcoMobile stability when slowed or parked. Like a motorcycle, the EcoMobile is steered with handlebars instead of a steering wheel and is capable of impressive lean angles (again, like a sporting motorcycle) in corners. Thanks to low coefficient of drag, the vehicle delivers bike-like fuel economy of 50 MPG highway, yet can reach a sports car-like top speed in excess of 150 MPH. It even relies on a motorcycle engine for propulsion, specifically the “laydown” water-cooled four-cylinder borrowed from BMW’s K series. Even in 100 horsepower form, it is strong enough to produce a 0-60 MPH time below six seconds.

An EcoMobile with its outriggers deployed.

Like an automobile, however, the EcoMobile features upright seating with back support and a headrest, utilizes three-point seatbelts, keeps rider and (in-line) passenger out of the elements and even boasts such available amenities as an audio system and air conditioning. Its design incorporates a long wheelbase and a low center of gravity for improved stability and handling, and the EcoMobile’s Kevlar monocoque construction ensures the vehicle’s safety. Wagner calls the EcoMobile the “safest two-wheeler ever built” and speaks of an (undeniably lucky) owner who crashed his EcoMobile at a speed of 250 KPH (155 MPH) and lived to tell the tale.

To be clear, the EcoMobile was not the first enclosed motorcycle, and the idea behind such a vehicle dates back nearly 100 years. The French-built Monotrace (which translates to “Single Track”) was popular in the 1920s, and it’s heritage traces back to the original German manufacturer, Einspur Auto (with “einspur” again translating to “single track”). The original Monotrace may have had a cabin and upright seating, but it used a retractable canvas roof, which proved suboptimal for both weather protection and high-speed operation. As affordable transportation, however, it offered those who couldn’t afford four wheels a motorized alternative to the bicycle, while delivering (a bit) more practicality than the motorcycle.

A pair of EcoMobiles on tour.

The next logical evolution of the idea came in the 1930s, with an enclosed motorcycle called the Dalnik, built in Czechoslovakia. Featuring improved aerodynamics and side-by-side seating, Dalniks were constructed into the 1960s and came in a dizzying array of models, including open-air and fully enclosed variants. Some offered outriggers for stability, while others used floor hatches that allowed the operator to get his feet down at a stop. Given their diminutive size, Dalniks were both fuel-efficient and space-efficient, taking up far less garage or storage shed space than a conventional automobile. They were less expensive, too, adding to their popularity in both prewar and postwar Europe.

Of all the EcoMobile’s strengths, however, a low selling price is not one of them. Essentially hand built in low volumes with premium components, manufacturer Peraves lacks the buying power associated with larger economies of scale, and the complex construction of the vehicle’s Kevlar monocoque requires many hours of skilled labor. Even in the EcoMobile’s early days, pricing was in the neighborhood of 88,000 Swiss francs, roughly the equivalent of $60,000. Despite this obstacle, Peraves constructed nearly 100 EcoMobiles between 1984 and 2005, before switching to the latest version, the Peraves MonoTracer, in 2007.

The electric-powered MonoTracer MTE-150.

The MonoTracer boasts the same advantages as the EcoMobile, but uses an updated Kevlar monocoque and features improved aerodynamics. The gasoline-powered MonoTracer MTI 1200 gets a 1.2-liter BMW four-cylinder engine, derived from BMW’s K-LT series of luxury touring motorcycles, and can be ordered with such options as climate control, premium audio and electronic stability control. A 200hp electric-powered version is now available as well, offering up a combination of higher performance and lower environmental impact, albeit at a higher price tag. With a claimed range of 250 kilometers (155 miles) between charges, Peraves claims the MonoTracer MTE-150 delivers sufficient range to be practical for the vast majority of commuters.

Could electric or gasoline-powered enclosed cabin motorcycles be the wave of the future? History says no, but Peraves believes otherwise, seeing enclosed cabin electric motorcycles as the high-demand vehicle of the future. It’s probably worth pointing out that skeptics once thought the world was flat, and that the horseless carriage would never gain wide acceptance among the general public; if Peraves (or another manufacturer) can produce an economically viable cabin motorcycle, this vehicle from the past may well represent the future of solo commuting.

First, I was disturbed this person didn’t have a helmet on,(it’s still a motorcycle), he picked a route that had only a few stops(which he rolled through), and was clearly speeding, looks like a hard vehicle to drive slow. I’ve logged many miles on a motorcycle, and not being able to put my feet down, would make me nervous. Although I feel personalized vehicles are the wave of the future, this doesn’t sit well with me. To me, motorcycles should remain just that, and if we are to go this route, a car like the Messerschmidt would be a better solution.

I have been riding an ECOMOBILE on USA roads for 10 years and over 100K miles. It takes some getting used to, but can cover more ground in a day than a conventional bike. It doesn’t wear the rider down with wind buffeting, doesn’t slow down for rain and gets 45 MPG at 130 MPH=450 mile range on 1 tank of gas @ 130 MPH. Did it in a no speed limit state.

Great story, and a fascinating idea. I believe the concept of a two-wheeled automobile with outrigger wheels dates back to 1912 and the Bi-Autogo, from James Scripps-Booth. It was an enormous beast powered by the first V8 built in Detroit. A couple of smaller, more nimble versions were built in 1939-40 by James Tingle, of Miami. His were powered by four-cylinder American Austin automobile engines. The first Tingle was a two-wheeled roadster, followed by an enclosed sedan with Chrysler Airflow-like side view. Tingle patented the design. After World War II, a gentleman named LaPointe tried a similar vehicle. But the most notable may have been the Gyro X, built in the 1960s by Alex Tremulis, most noted for having designed the Tucker. The Gyro X was stabalized at speed using gyroscopic technology Tremulis planned to apply to a similar vehicle, the Gyron, which he designed while at Ford Motor Co. I believe Jeff Lane is currently involved in the Gyro X’s restoration.

I have to agree with Howard about the apparent drawbacks of this design. However, there must be some way to come to stop in it without falling over — at least I would hope so. That seems like a pretty important detail to omit from the article. Without some sort of prop or outrigger, you would write off the bodywork the first time out. Is there any answer regarding this little item?

Also, the outriggers stick out from the body even in the raised position, so if you do neglect to deploy them the bike will fall on them and not damage the body. Even laying on its side, the canopy can still be opened and the vehicle righted as you would with a big motorcycle(a tough lift for sure).

No Ron. Cross-winds and articulated lorries (as we call tractor trailers) are not a problem. Ecos & MTs actually deviate from their path less in a crosswind than even a naked motorcycle.
(lean more, deviate less) as proven in a test at the Daimler facility in Germany over 20 years ago. See here: http://www.bikeweb.com/node/1805

I think this is fantastic. I’ve ridden motorcycles for years, mostly commuting these days and I would love something like this. The closest thing to piloting your own tron light cycle My two drawbacks are just inherent in the design. The low profile of the vehicle would make it extremely hard to see by other drivers in traffic. As a rider, the part of the video where he’s surrounded by Pickups in traffic would have me worried of not being seen by other drivers. I also worry about the outriggers. It would be cool if they could use accelerometers to account for speed and lean angle to have them automatically deploy when stopping. Takes some of the stress out of remembering that crucial step.

Jeremy. Think about your proposal for one minute, in terms you are familiar with. Imagine you were filtering through traffic at slow speed on a normal bike, feet up, when suddenly an invisible pair of hands grabbed your ankles and yanked them onto the ground, simply because you had slowed to say, 5mph. It would be a nightmare. Far more stressful than remembering to put your outriggers down. It becomes second nature in a very short space of time, believe me. Automatic outriggers would be a complete nightmare and it never ceases to amaze me how many people think they would be a good idea, or even assume that it’s a standard feature! Sometimes you want to keep them up at 0mph, other times (on snow and ice for example) you want them down at 20mph.

Hey Steve, I was at Brno in 2004, and I remember your barrel roll! Despite that, you gave me some good advice about eco handling and I give you the credit. It took me about 6 more years to get round to buying an eco, but I now own 005. There are 3 ecos and 2 monos in the UK, but I reckon mine gets the most mileage. Regards Andy T

I’ve gone a lot of miles on a motorcycle and I approach this one with a lot of mixed feelings. First of all it looks like a blast to ride and it would keep you out of some of the more unpleasant elements but then, I get to wondering how maneuverable it is. For example, can you avoid harmful situations with one of these as fast as you could with, say, a Norton? I’ve had a lot of close calls, mostly from drivers who would look right at me then turn (or stop) right in front of me. I was able to stop or swerve away but I wonder if I could as easily with this unit? I like the idea of the ‘training wheels.’ In some cases they should be automatic. I can think of many occasions riding when I should NOT have been riding and almost forgot to take my feet off the pegs at a stoplight.

Whilst it solves the problem of protection form the elements, it defeats the purpose of why we ride motorcycles in the first place. I think the best solution for those requiring protection is a trike. There have been a few creations along these lines and some are fantastic performers. I think the Carver was one.

Hi Martin, I agree on something like an enclosed 3 wheeler, although, I don’t like the fact that the single wheel is riding in the grease strip. H-D made an experimental trike code named “The Penster”. I never heard of it, but I think H-D really missed the boat, considering the success of the Can-Am Spyder.

I’ve driven a lot of Priuses (Prii?) in my former role, and none of them delivered anything even remotely resembling entertainment value. That said, they’re reliable and fuel efficient, ideal for those who view driving as a chore instead of something to be enjoyed.

The advantage of the MonoTracer (in my opinion, anyway) is that it seems to be an E-Ticket ride that also manages to achieve respectable fuel economy.

I agree that the price is an obstacle, but that’s the difference between something built by hand in extremely low volumes, and something mass-produced by robots in massive quantities. It’s all about economy of scale.

I’m a BMW rider that’s obsessed with helmets and safety, have studied the Ecomobile/Monotracer since the mid 90’s and have had the privilege of logging about 50 miles in one. Not only has the US DOT approved the type for us roads, but it has received the helmet exemption it deserves by having a better roll over protection than many cars, stops faster, has excellent low speed dynamics (lousy turning radius), but is more fun than any bike I’ve ever ridden. When I get mine in a few years, I’m quite certain I will never ride a std motorcycle again. The author didn’t mention it but the inventor himself was t-boned on the freeway years ago (Ill advised but legal U-turn) and only had a few cuts. Eco didn’t survive but he’d have been dead if hit like he was on a bike.

Don’t be so skeptical gents. It’s indeed amazing how intuitive and ideally designed the landing gear system is.

I found the whole package to be downright practical, but carries a massive sticker price. It also has more luggage space than a Porsche 993!

Just to set the record straight. Arnold was NOT doing a U-turn on a ‘freeway’. It was a simple 2 lane country road. He was driving back and forth for the benefit of a film crew and conditions were bad – daytime but very dark and raining. He failed to notice a woman approaching in a dark car with no lights on and she T-boned him. The car was written off, the Eco wasn’t. Arnold suffered a minor head injury but was able to go to a planned meeting only a couple of hours later. I’ve seen the photos and they are impressive.

I was thinking about this post all day and those retractable outriggers just bug me. I wonder if it couldn’t be a low to the ground version of Piaggio’s MP3 3-wheeled leaning scooter? You would have stability when slow or stopped but still lean into corners like a motorcycle. It could be a more elegant solution….

Jeremy, I am probably the only person here who has ridden Ecomobiles, Monotracers, MP3s and Carvers. If you made the MP3 any lower to the ground, it wouldn’t be able to corner properly. The Carver is a wonderful vehicle and a more realistic proposition for a lot of people because it’s almost as much fun and a lot easier to drive. On the other hand, it weighs more, but barely has half the power and has much less room for passenger and luggage. http://www.bikeweb.com/node/2552

I’d back Paul up on this, having ridden a Carver briefly and an eco a lot, and also spent a weekend chasing a Carver around the country. The Carver is much better at rapid changes of direction, and is easier to drive in town. The eco has more baggage space, the Carver has none. But because of the better aerodynamics and bigger engine, the eco leaves the Carver behind at speeds exceeding 80mph, and if you want to play at 90, 100, or 120 the eco disappears over the hill. It was designed to be at home in the above 100mph world, which means the German autobahn.

I’m jealous that both you and Blez have seen them in person and that Blez has ridden one. All of those options are cool machines. I’m an Industrial designer by trade so my mind is turning and thinking of other possibilities

I seem to recall a “leaning” enclosed 3-wheeler designed and built as a concept vehicle by GM in the 70’s or 80’s. If my memory serves me right, it seemed like a very practical and attractive commuter.

Good summary overall, but a couple of quick further comments. There are several key machines in the history of FFery not mentioned here. The AVro Monocar of 1926 and the FEWhitworth to name two pre-war ones.
Then there was Mr Lawson’s heavily modified post-war Neracar. The Quasar of 1976-82 was another key machine.
Also, I’m pretty sure that, pioneering though they were, the Dalniks were a series of one-offs and never in production. I’ve sat in the one that we filmed at the first Eco World Championships of 1991. At the risk of banging my own drum too loudly, I recommend a viewing of ten minutes of pre-Clarkson Top Gear, from 1988: 5 mins of FF history, 1909-1988 here:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=foAgByo_txA&mode=related&search=
5 minutes with Arnold Wagner and test driving the very first K100-powered Peraves Oekomobil, built in 1985 here:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k7VvD7SYzJs
PNB

You also forgot to mention that it’s not actually available yet! Far too cheap to be realistic IMHO.
I’ll believe it when I see a real one in real video, not CGI or photoshop.
But apart from that it doesn’t lean in the turns, which is where a huge proportion of the fun of a motorcycle – and an Eco/MT and a Carver – comes from.

Vitriolic, keep up! Please read my answer to Jeremy above, which explains the answer to this very question for those who do not have the imagination to realise how awful it would be to have no control of when their feet go up and down when riding a motorcycle at slow speed…..
Apart from that there’s the whole question of dealing with lateral acceleration when using the landing gear…..which has seen many a seasoned motorcyclist come to grief in training…..

I hope this ancient video about the 1991 World Championships, featuring no fewer than 17 Ecomobiles and 22 competitors at the Most motor racing circuit in Czecho, will open a few more eyes and minds. The drive up off the ground from a ‘fallen over’ position is particularly impressive to watch, I feel, and enormously satisfying to do! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GPZmqK5uogA